To anyone reading this thread and actually contemplating doing what the OP suggests, let me remind you all that the internet is a scary place. This is an open forum. There are wackos out there whom you are best served only corresponding with a user name. That's before you get to the point where there's organized efforts to root out people who complain about the government.

Your objection is noted for the record.

Next case!

This is really pretty funny. We're supposed to put our names on here lend credibility to a post? Heck, there are newscasters and radio hosts who love to say their names repeatedly and I don't believe some of what they say.

And no, as I've said before, I don't believe much of what's said here in this forum. But you know what? I actually think for myself and come to a conclusion as to what likely really happened in a situation using my own experiences. If you think adding a name onto a post or handle is going to be the end-all and add credibility, you're sorely mistaken.

This board is used as a sounding device against the "security" theater that really is out there. It has been proven that voicing objections will have you set aside and/or get the LEO involved.

Giving your name out doesn't do anything....even in high-profile cases. Look at the infamous "Kip Hawley Is An Idiot" incident. His real name was used everywhere. Even the ACLU got involved. After the international publicity this FlyerTalker got, you know what the TSA response was? Character assassaintation, where a TSA spokesperson said he was combative, despite law enforcement saying he wasn't.

Sadly, the OP has thrown in the towel on this issue. Because, after SIX MONTHS of submitting his name to everyone, including the ACLU, his political representatives and the TSA, he has not received a response from the TSA.

But let look at somewhere else where being forthright got nothing. In Boston, where a screener fired off an obscenity and wrongfully confiscated items. The response was to lie about "designed inconsistency." How is it a lie? Well a TSAer has stated there is no "designed inconsistency." That all goes to the points I regularly make of the TSA having zero accountability.

So, if you think add a name a post is worth something, you're more than free to think that. However, even when your name is splattered across the internet, not just in this forum, it doesn't mean a damn thing.

*hands Dovster a cookie*

Good for you. As someone who doesn't know you outside of posts under Dovster, how do I know that you didn't make up your name and address?

In addition, I don't post everything I do here on the forums. If I get something particularly interesting back from my Congresscritter or the airline, I'll post the letter. I've done both and in particular, the letter UA sent me after the liquid lunacy has been linked many times on this board. However, a lot of what I do is talking to my peers about TSA and helping them see what a farce it is. I also wear my Kip Hawley is an Idiot t-shirt when I travel. Of course, unless you happen to be traveling with me or happen to be in the airport I'm traveling thru that day, you'll never notice it as I've never made the news with it.

If you feel better pontificating and stroking your ego, go ahead. I choose not to post my identity publicly online because I have security concerns based on my job. I have met a bunch of FT'ers and corresponded with a bunch who know who I am. If I feel you have a need to know, you'll know who I am. But you don't need to know.

Super

Or posting under a pseudonym like I have been seems to be a guarantee that most of my posts won't be posted. :td:

No, say it ain't so. http://www.securityfocus.com/news/97

Please re-read my original post. I did not say that adding a name onto a post on FT is the end-all to anything. I said, in fact:

And you are right that voicing objections may well get you hassled. I mentioned that, too, in my OP:

But if you (and I use that in the collective sense -- not just you, personally) are truly interested in getting a change than you are going to have to do more than just make anonymous posts on an internet forum where almost everyone agrees with you anyhow.

Let me tell you a story from my own experience: In the early 1970's, I was a wire service reporter covering state government in New Jersey.

One day, a woman who worked for my apartment complex in Somerset County mentioned that the state housing inspectors were checking the complex that week. I was very surprised (and not at all happy) to learn that if nobody was at home the management was required to unlock the apartments for the inspectors.

I called the state office which handles this, spoke to the director, and was informed that this is true. He told me that no search warrant is needed because they were not looking for violations of the law by tenants but rather building violations.

He admitted, however, that if an inspector were to spot something illegal (eg: drugs) in the apartment, he would have not only the right but also the legal obligation to notify the police.

As far as I was concerned, this completely negated the value of the IVth Amendment for renters.

I wrote the story, put it on the wire, and it was picked up by most New Jersey newspapers, as well as some in NYC and Philadelphia. Within a month, the following happened:

1. Editorials about this appeared on television, radio, and newspapers.

2. The New Jersey ACLU held a press conference announcing that it intended to bring suit against the state.

3. Bills were introduced into both the State Assembly and the State Senate revoking this authority.

4. The inspectors' office changed it policy, substituting the following: Before an apartment could be inspected, the tenant had to be notified twice of this intention. If he objected, his apartment would not be inspected. Inspectors could only enter with his permission or lack of response after receiving the two notices.

So, yes, it is possible to institute change -- but not by moaning about the situation under anonymous user names.

(Some follow up: Because of this change of policy, the Legislature did not bother changing the law. Many years later, the responsibility for inspections was taken out of the hands of the state and given to the municipalities.

(In a few cases, municipalities reverted to the original practice of entering without notice. Eventually, this was challenged in federal court and was held to be unconsitutional -- and the court ordered that municipalities follow the "two notice" rule.)

Courtesy is not what stopped me from responding to LEX-LGA Commuter.

Whether he has put himself at more personal risk, or whether I have, is unimportant.

I have no idea of how much physical danger LEX-LGA Commuter has been in, but I am going to assume that as a 20 year vet, he has at least equalled what I have faced.

However, this only strengthens my argument. If he (and millions of others) have risked their lives in defense of liberty, then the kinds of reasons we see posted here (losing anonymity, being hassled by the TSA, running into problems with LEOs) pale in comparison.

Let's see:

1. You can contact Craz, who was the FTer who stopped by my house.

2. You could PM Monitor and Shirl, both of whom visited me on my kibbutz.

3. You could look at this thread, get the names of those who attended the Meet, and then ask them if I supplied them with the same name and address (along with bank account info) for them to send payments to me.

4. You could contact several different FTers (including a TS&S moderator) who have mailed things to me over the years.

5. You could go to this thread, get the names of over 100 FTers who have met me in person and see if they have any doubts to my identity.

Or, of course, you could choose to believe donsig and decide that I am actually a TSA employee determined to out you.

Of course, I'm in the same boat with them as in you, as people can still say what they want and I don't know any of them any better than I know you. See my point?

:rolleyes:

Strawman. I never said that you were a plant. False choices.

Who you are is pretty irrelevant for discussion purposes anyway. If you want to post your name, good for you. That doesn't mean I have to participate in a d!ck waving contest by posting my real name, nor does it mean my comments are less valid because I don't use my name. You're free to use your own yardstick for determining who you believe/don't believe on here as we all do.

Dearest Dov Ben-Galil of Kibbutz Yiron, Israel,

Do you know how many threads started on Flyertalk led to wider media coverage?

I have no idea either though I know you had a very prominent thread a while back and in my six years posting to Flyertalk, threads that I started here led to reporting in National media, one in this forum.

I know you disagree fundamentally with the majority opinion here regarding TSA and travel security in general, but I doubt many take to kindly here to your "put up or shut up" ultimatum regarding the manner in which we post to a public forum, it simply comes across as bitter.

Signed respectfully while exercising my right as an American citizen to maintain my anonimity......

OutOfOffice

I have neither made a "put up or shut up ultimatum" nor would I have the authority to do so even if I wanted to do.

What I have done is tell a simple fact of life: If someone is truly bothered by the TSA (or, for that matter, anything else) to the point where he spends a lot of effort posting on a bulletin board about it, he would be best served by taking more effective action.

Are you people reading the same thread I'm reading? I haven't seen anywhere where Dovster says you should use your real name on this thread or the internet. He simply made the point that real action makes more of an impact than anonymous posting on boards like this, and that some of the more vocal bad-a$$es from FT don't show up in the media. That's all I've read, but I can be a little dense sometime. Ask any of my legion of ex-wives.

And have you noticed that some of the more vocal keyboard commandos on the TS/S board have nothing to say about this subject? :confused:

Well that has me truly wondering why you singled out this particular subject when the same argument can be made about a thousand other subjects on Flyertalk and across the internet.

Disagreement with a pervasive opinion does not give one the right to discount or question the sincerity of those you disagree with especially when it's being done in the vacuum of an on line forum.

And you also made an erroneous assumption that people on here don't do anything else. I know a lot have tried to do something more. I know a lot haven't. I wouldn't paint with such a broad brush.

Indeed, but given the fact that you have no idea what people do off this board, it's hard to see this thread as anything but inflammatory.